پنجشنبه 13 دی 1403
[Archive]
دوره 8، شماره 4 - ( 4-1389 )
جلد 8 شماره 4 صفحات 196-191 |
برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Yazdanpanah M, Eslami M, Andalib P, Motlaq M E, Jadidi N, Nakhaee N. Acceptability and side effects of Cyclofem© once-a-month injectable contraceptive in Kerman, Iran. IJRM 2010; 8 (4) :191-196
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-190-fa.html
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-190-fa.html
Acceptability and side effects of Cyclofem© once-a-month injectable contraceptive in Kerman, Iran. International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine. 1389; 8 (4) :191-196
چکیده: (2409 مشاهده)
Background: When family planning programmes offer a wide variety of contraceptives, contraceptive prevalence would be higher overall.
Objective: To determine the acceptability of Cyclofem© and to evaluate its side effects and continuation rate in Iran.
Materials and Methods: An introductory study of Cyclofem© was conducted in seven districts of Kerman Province, the largest province of Iran, in three phases. At first, 14394 women attending randomly selected urban and rural health centers representing different socioeconomic classes were invited to choose Cyclofem© after a standard schedule of counselling. At the second phase 418 of those who accepted Cyclofem© and 354 of those who refused to use the method were randomly selected to participate in an interview. At the third phase the first group was followed up for one year at regular one-month intervals.
Results: Nearly 12.6% (n=1809) of 14394 women counselled to choose Cyclofem© accepted the contraceptive method. They had a mean (±SD) age of 28.5 (±6.5) years. Fear of side effects was the most common cause of refusal to use Cyclofem©. The one-year continuation rate was 21.2%. The three main side effects leading to early discontinuation of Cyclofem© were nausea (18%), prolonged menses (15.8%), and amenorrhea (14.7%), respectively. Conclusion: The one-year continuation rate of Cyclofem© use in Iran has been lower than other countries. Further research is necessary to improve continuation rates.
Objective: To determine the acceptability of Cyclofem© and to evaluate its side effects and continuation rate in Iran.
Materials and Methods: An introductory study of Cyclofem© was conducted in seven districts of Kerman Province, the largest province of Iran, in three phases. At first, 14394 women attending randomly selected urban and rural health centers representing different socioeconomic classes were invited to choose Cyclofem© after a standard schedule of counselling. At the second phase 418 of those who accepted Cyclofem© and 354 of those who refused to use the method were randomly selected to participate in an interview. At the third phase the first group was followed up for one year at regular one-month intervals.
Results: Nearly 12.6% (n=1809) of 14394 women counselled to choose Cyclofem© accepted the contraceptive method. They had a mean (±SD) age of 28.5 (±6.5) years. Fear of side effects was the most common cause of refusal to use Cyclofem©. The one-year continuation rate was 21.2%. The three main side effects leading to early discontinuation of Cyclofem© were nausea (18%), prolonged menses (15.8%), and amenorrhea (14.7%), respectively. Conclusion: The one-year continuation rate of Cyclofem© use in Iran has been lower than other countries. Further research is necessary to improve continuation rates.
نوع مطالعه: Original Article |
فهرست منابع
1. Mehryar AH, Ahmadi-Nia S, Kazemipour S. Reproductive health in Iran: pragmatic achievements, unmet needs, and ethical challenges in a theocratic system. Stud Fam Plann 2007; 38: 352-361. [DOI:10.1111/j.1728-4465.2007.00146.x]
2. Economic and social commission for Asian and Pacific (ESCAP). A family planning success story. Pop Headliners 2002; 286:5.
3. Vahidnia F. Case study: fertility decline in Iran. Popul Environ 2007; 28: 259-266. [DOI:10.1007/s11111-007-0050-9]
4. Faghihzadeh S, Babaee Rochee G, Lmyian M, Mansourian F, Rezasoltani P. Factors associated with unwanted pregnancy. J Sex Marietal Ther 2003; 29: 157-164. [DOI:10.1080/713847165]
5. Majlessi F, Forooshani AR, Shariat M. Prevalence of induced abortion and associated complications in women attending hospitals in Isfahan. East Mediterr Health J 2008; 14: 103-109.
6. Nojomi M, Akbarian A, Ashory-Moghadam S. Burden of abortion: Induced and spontaneous. Arch Iran Med 2006; 9: 39 - 45.
7. Ross J, Hardee K, Mumford E, Eid S. Contraceptive Method Choice in Developing Countries. Int Fam Plann Perspect 2001; 28: 32-40. [DOI:10.2307/3088273]
8. Garza-Flores J. Cyclofem©/Cyclo-ProveraTM: Emerging countries' perspective. Int J Gyn Obst 1998; 62 (Suppl. 1): S31-S36. [DOI:10.1016/S0020-7292(98)00087-3]
9. Shulman LP, Nelson AL, Darney PD. Recent developments in hormone delivery systems. Am J Obst Gyn 2004; 190: S39-48. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.064]
10. Simbar M, Tehrani FR, Hashemi Z, Zham H, Fraser IS. A comparative study of Cyclofem and depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) effects on endometrial vasculature. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2007; 33: 271-276. [DOI:10.1783/147118907782101887]
11. Hajikazemi E, Nikpour S, Haghani H. Reasons for discontinuation of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. Intl Cong Ser 2004; 1271: 315- 318. [DOI:10.1016/j.ics.2004.05.067]
12. El Nahal N, Hassan EO, El Houssinie M. Acceptability of once-a-month injectable contraceptives Cyclofem© and Mesigynat©: Focus group discussion. Contraception 1999; 59: 369-375. [DOI:10.1016/S0010-7824(99)00050-5]
13. Garza-Flores J, Morales del Olmo O, Fuziwara JL, Figueroa GJ, Alonso A, Monroy J. Introduction of Cyclofem© once-a-month injectable contraceptive in Mexico. Contraception 1998; 58: 7-12. [DOI:10.1016/S0010-7824(98)00062-6]
14. World Health Organization. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. Fourth edition. Geneva, World Health Organization; 2009.
15. Affandi B. Combination injectable contraceptives for contraception: RHL commentary (last revised: 20 February 2006). The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization.
16. Ruminjo JK, Sekadde-Kigondu CB, Karanja JG. Comparative acceptability of combined and progestin-only injectable contraceptives in Kenya. Contraception 2005; 72: 138-145. [DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2005.04.001]
17. Say L, Ortayli N, Nalbant H. Women's acceptance of an injectable progestin-only contraceptive in a free-choice environment in Turkey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000; 5: 68-70. [DOI:10.1080/13625180008500368]
18. Pandi SP, Hadjar LNE, Prihugiharto T. Introductory trial of the once-a-month injectable contraceptive, Cyclofem, in Indonesia. Adv Contracept 1993; 9: 33-40. [DOI:10.1007/BF02115898]
19. Snow R, Hardy E, Kneuper E, Hebling EM, Hall G. Women's responses to menses and nonbleeding intervals in the USA, Brazil and Germany. Contraception 2007; 76: 23-29. [DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2007.03.008]
20. Nakhaee N, Mirahmadizadeh AR. Five-year continuation rate and reasons for early removal of Norplant in Shiraz, Iran. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2002; 7: 223-226. [DOI:10.1080/ejc.7.4.223.226]
21. Canto de Cetina TE, Luna MO, Cetina Canto JA, Bassol S. Menstrual pattern and lipid profiles during use of medroxyprogesterone acetate and estradiol cypionate and NET-EN (200 mg) as contraceptive injections. Contraception 2004; 69: 115-119. [DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2003.09.015]
22. Sonnenberg FA, Burkman RT, Hagerty CG, Speroff L, Speroff T. Costs and net health effects of contraceptive methods. Contraception 2004; 69: 447-459. [DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2004.03.008]
| بازنشر اطلاعات | |
 |
این مقاله تحت شرایط Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License قابل بازنشر است. |
